Filed under: Car Buying, Maintenance, Green
Columnist discovers used Civic more frugal than new Prius
A columnist for The Economist confirms what many of us thought was obvious. New is not necessarily better and it's good to keep your nose clean.
Moving from London to Texas (what a shock that must have been), the writer needed a car, and wanted one of the (what was then) shiny new Priuses. But not even a bright green nature could persuade the frugal side to part with $30k.
A little research turned up a previously-titled Honda Civic LX 5-speed for just under $11k. At first, the little Honda got 34 MPG, impressive, but not the 60 MPG claimed by the Prius. But after some basic maintenance (new air filter and an oil change) the Civic's highway numbers jumped to 40 MPG. Sweet. The writer's aunt boosted her hybrid Civic's numbers from 46 mpg to 50 mpg just by properly inflating her tires and setting the cruise control.
So by forgoing the latest and greatest, the author saved almost $20k. By spending $25 on an oil change and $10 on an air filter, the Honda burns fewer gallons of gas. No, the columnist hasn't discovered some ancient automotive secret, but the writer does show how small, inexpensive choices can positively affect the wallets and environments of Prius and H2 drivers alike.
[Source: The Economist]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Michael Karesh 10:09AM (4/10/2007)
Journalism at its best.
The 34 MPG figure was based on the previous owner's claim that it could get from Austin to New Orleans on a single tank. Which is about the weakest source of a statistic I've ever read in a magazine of this caliber. The 40 MPG figure was based on an actual measurement.
I also like how the writer owns a 2001, but the photo is of the new Civic. And how it highlights the Honda emblem. Did someone at Honda's PR agency write this piece?
I don't know whether to think that the Economist is generally this sloppy, or if like most major magazines they take cars about as seriously as the latest Hollywood gossip, and so relax their standards.
Either way, this article is worthless.
Want real fuel economy info? I've been collecting it from owners using the most detailed fuel economy survey I'm aware of (because numerous factors intrude). Results here:
http://www.truedelta.com/fuel_economy.php
And, no, people can't just state which cities they can travel between on a gallon of gas.
Reply
epilonious 10:10AM (4/10/2007)
http://www.greenhybrid.com/compare/mileage/
Insight manual > insight auto > prius II == hybrid Civic I
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/2005seleeng2f.jsp?year=2006&make=Toyota&model=Prius
Prius II >>> Civic LX 5-speed
Those pesky statistics, with their real world numbers and large data sets.
If this lady can get 40 mpg in a civic LX, she could probably get 60 in a Prius... and then she would have nav (if she's whining about $30K for a prius then she was looking at the gussied up model) and an automatic so she wouldn't have to keep clutch-punching in heavy traffic.
Reply
fd 10:14AM (4/10/2007)
I never understood a 3 & 4 gear automatic. An extra gear or two in auto gearboxed US vehicles in the would help get better mpg at highway speeds. In many you start to see a drastic drop when start going above 60 - 65 ... and that's what has contributed to the low speed limits.
We need to get that ideal mpg from 50-55 to extend upwards a bit to a good 70-75.
The typo in the article is cool. I've wondered if it would be possible to dial in cruise control or better a throttle limiter to a certain MPG. Set your car to drive at x mpg in the city and y mpg on the highway.
Reply
Michael Karesh 10:15AM (4/10/2007)
I now see Autoblog also uses a photo of the current Civic. As in the Economist, this implies that a 2006 or newer Civic can be bought for $20,000 less than a Prius. It just isn't so.
How about a photo of a well-used 2001 Civic?
I'm sure this eBay seller would be happy to lend a photo:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Honda-Civic-LX-01-2001-HONDA-CIVIC-LX-4-door-82k-mi-Clean-in-out-02-03_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ6256QQihZ019QQitemZ290102984778QQrdZ1
Or, to save even more money on a used 2001 Civic:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Honda-Civic-2001-HONDA-CIVIC-EX-COUPE-5-SPEED-SALVAGE-REBUILDABLE_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ6256QQihZ008QQitemZ180104390686QQrdZ1
Reply
fawgcutter 10:20AM (4/10/2007)
Remember this is highway miles, where the hybrid feature is probably not heavily utilized. Out in Oklahoma and Texas where there's lots of open road and level terrain, you can get good mileage in any car - if you watch your speed.
Not too surprised by this. It's all stuff we've been preached, but forget to do.
Reply
masarak 10:20AM (4/10/2007)
Well, regardless of the journalistic professionalism of the Economist's editorial/column, it does make a good point about real world operating costs. My Civic gets between 34-40 mpg all the time. I know because I figure out the mpg at every fill up. I strongly considered buying a Prius for the mpg and environmental factors, but decided on the Civic for the simple fact that it would take 6-10 years of driving the Prius before I saw any money savings compared to owning a significantly cheaper ULEV vehicle such as the Civic.
Reply
Sam 10:28AM (4/10/2007)
Karesh, why are you so up in arms about a used economy car being a better deal (in absolute real-world dollars) than the Prius? With proper maintenance & synthetic oil, the Civic will probably reach 250k miles on the original powertrain with not much more than normal scheduled maintenance.
And being in Texas, the real-world mileage of the Civic & Prius is going to be pretty close on interstates. The Prius won't have much chance to use its hybrid capabilities on flat interstate at 70-80 mph.
Reply
Jro 10:34AM (4/10/2007)
Do a Google search of driving directions from Texas to London. Check out step #30!!!! Hilarious!!!!
Reply
albeik 10:51AM (4/10/2007)
Enthusiasts in Japan have hacked their Priuses, and use zen-like driving techniques to get up to 116 miles per gallon (they go 1000 miles on a 13 gallon tank of gas).
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0704050703apr06,0,1765741.story?coll=chi-business-hed
Reply
Steve 11:01AM (4/10/2007)
If the point of this article was just to point out that reasonably sized cars with 4-cylinder engines are efficient means of transportation, then I guess this article gets the point across. In most parts of the world, a car like a Civic sedan is a mid-sized family car, after all. Heck, a new Civic Sedan weighs nearly 2800 lbs and has more space inside than the Accord had 15 years ago.
I agree, however, that the article misses an important point about hybrids, in that the real benefit comes in stop and go driving, not on steady interstates. With the exception of the Insight which was small, aerodynamic, and very light, a Prius gives the most advantage in the city. Even the window sticker makes this clear... as inaccurate as the EPA milage figures are.
If this writer lived in Austin, Dallas, or Houston (which all have horrendous traffic problems) then he would have enjoyed a Prius while sitting in traffic jams.
Reply
Bill 11:02AM (4/10/2007)
My 83 Civic 1300FE got 40 city, high 40's highway, and easily passed 50+ MPG. Sure it didn't have airbags, and is a deathtrap by standards then and now, but if anybody knows where I can find a nice rust-free specimen, please let me know! Trading that thing was a huge mistake.
Reply
Chet 11:21AM (4/10/2007)
It's fine to point out that this isn't a fair comparison, since hybrids' strength is in stop-and-go traffic, but... most people aren't car people, and just think the Prius is MAGIC. The more articles that shed light on the variables of fuel economy, particularly those in outside-the-car-geek media, the better.
Criticizing the rise from 34mpg to 40mpg number as misleading similarly misses the forest for the trees. The point is that simple maintenance can make a significant difference. Even if it's only 2mpg, that's fuel being wasted by most Americans today, who seem to think tire pressure is a personal choice with no wrong answers and motor oil would last forever if the manufacturers would stop building defective product.
Reply
olddavid 11:24AM (4/10/2007)
In the real world, actual numbers are very valuable- regardless of who is posting them- as they allow all drivers to use them in their own calculations. Everyone drives in a different way, and consequently, everyone has different MPG statistics. As a project, I purchased a 93 SHO to use as a bomber between the two main cities I commute between. I figured I could drive it until the wheels came off, and easily recover my investment(?) in mileage without trashing my wife's dear hotrod. Imagine my surprise when my first tank showed 31.4 MPG at 75 mph. I have yet to achieve that since, but it consistently gets 25, which is a major bonus, as it is a stealth car with an honest 220 hp. So, who is greener- me by not buying a new car, even if it gets 50 mpg, or the guy with the Prius? I guess the answer depends on how you calculate the benefits, but I am feeling pretty smug these days with the $$$ I have saved on insurance and payments. What a concept- used cars! But I guess I might have a different take the day it strands me on I-5, in a puddle of oil and anti-freeze. Where's that AAA card, anyway?
Reply
aliasfox 11:24AM (4/10/2007)
I can attest to Civics getting mid 30s and up - driving my ex's '03 on the highway between 75-85 mph yielded 34 MPG for me, she got about 37 when she was in the driver's seat. This was calculated at each fill up.
And has anyone looked at used Civic prices lately? They're insane!
Reply
James 11:25AM (4/10/2007)
I could not agree more with this line of thinking.
Reply
Mike 11:35AM (4/10/2007)
So, does this article mean that the cruise control in a Civic hybrid is set according to fuel consumption?
>She also started using cruise control, which she set at a restrained 60 miles to the gallon.
>Immediately she was getting around 50 miles to the gallon.
If so, then it doesn't seem to be very effective at what it claims to do.
Reply
Matthew 12:14PM (4/10/2007)
Jro, that is awesome. I need to print those directions out.
Reply
Bob-omb 12:18PM (4/10/2007)
Here we go again. The Prius gets such fantastic overall mileage because of the city driving, not the highway driving. If you do all highway driving, a hybrid won't be the clear choice. If you do some city driving, it will be.
Reply
Michael Karesh 12:22PM (4/10/2007)
jscro #8:
I'm fastidious about research methods and accurate information. I criticize those who are not.
Before you call me the lowest of the low, check out who's playing at the level of name calling rather than actually offering up any actual information.
In my opinion, people who think nasty names are a substitute for an actual argument are the lowest of the low. My four-year-old can call people names, though he doesn't know all of the words you freely use in a public space.
akintz #10:
I checked out the site you mention. The survey includes no questions about driving conditions or the driving style.
The fact of the matter is that the media are tilted against start-ups like mine. They'll freely give the established players tons of free publicity, and will rarely if ever post a critique of these players.
The people who run Autoblog have been different. They've posted a few blog entries about my work, and have been supportive of my comments. This is what the alternative media are about.
But a few people who can do no better than engage in name calling and obscenities are reducing the site to a cesspool.
I provide actual, useful information in my comments. In this case, I pointed out that the touted gain in fuel economy was based on ridiculous methods. The 34 MPG is based on the previous owner claiming the car could go between two cities on a single tank. Did they say the tank was bone dry upon reaching the destination? I'll wager there were a few gallons remaining. Factor those in, and you're back to 40 MPG.
But some people would rather just read the headlines, lazily assume everything contained in the story is rock solid fact--it is the Economist, after all, leave a nasty content-free comment, and move on.
I'd hate to think that many people are this way. Any that are this way deserve to be misinformed and ignorant.
Reply
Michael Karesh 12:28PM (4/10/2007)
Sam #7:
I'm not up in arms about the key point of the story. But I don't judge the quality of a story simply based on its conclusions. How these conclusions were arrived at counts. And the piece in question is incredibly sloppy.
The Economist would not publish an article using such methods about anything they consider a serious topic. At least I hope they would not. Hearsay from a single individual only counts as evidence when the subject isn't taken seriously.
Reply